Flowering Venus

I would appreciate thoughts on this. The photograph is of the flower

that is starting to appear on a Venus Flytrap. I took it as I was

just getting a feel for using my new ancient second hand Pentacon

1.8/50 lens and this seemed to be a suitable subject to try it close-

up and wide open for a narrow DOF.

 

What I'm interested in hearing thoughts on are....

1. does this subject work in BW with sepia tint?

2. have I gone too narrow on DOF? (I notice that some of the

appearing flow is out of focus and wonder if this is too much so)

and 3. I'd be interested in thoughts on composition. Does it matter

that the typical Venus Flytrap working parts are not included in the

image?

 

Many thanks for your help!

In my view this is a beautiful photo. I like the overall softness which in combination with the monochromatic tone gives the sense of being shot long time ago with a very old camera. I like the composition, it is dynamic and its tubular helix-like shape gives the feeling of a mysterious creature probing and being ready to attack. Well done!

1. Yes this works for me in sepia. The sepia tone works well with the rather murky middle tones that make up most of this image. I would even suggest going further and using a darker tone.

 

2. I am not sure what you mean by " appearing flow " but I do think this would benefit from some point on the flower buds being in focus. I like the narrow DoF quite a bit and the ever increasing width that it adds to the flower stem as it travels back from the flower buds is very cool. It give a serpentine effect or the appearance of being a dragons tail.

 

3.Heck no Pete -- it's not a botanical study so what you include or omit is irrelevant. In terms of composition my brain keeps wanting to turn this 90 degrees CW, but that could just be me.

1. I thinks it does work in Sepia.

2. Your use of DOF in my opinion is precise it emphasizes the flower and it creates a very interesting viewing sequence.

3. No I dont think it matters.

 

I love this photo. Congratulations.

 

Guillermo

1. Yes. I'd go darker too -- greater overall contrast might be nice too. But, this is largely a matter of taste and this has a nice softness that would be lost if you went too far down the path I just suggested.

 

2. I like the DOF and the winding, snaking, widening form is very nice. I'm having difficulty finding the point of focus on the flower though. This where I think more edge contrast would definitely help. There may be a point that is technically in focus and sharp; but, there isn't the 'appearance of sharpness' that I can find in the flower.

 

3. No. Unless, you want your title to make sense to the viewer without having to explain it. If you could get a 'trap' just OOF in the background that might be a good compromise.

 

Hi Pete, it took me sometime to comment on this one, as it is so different from what I do.... but I came to it several times, and I played with it as well on my monitor, it is interesting ( btw, what is "venus flytrap" ) means? I think that the form is interesting, but I tried it 90 degree CW,and much darker in general, it accentuates the flower . I like the shallow DOF and the difference between the flower form and the angled ellement ( that I don't know if this means "venus flytrap"....) behind the flower.

 

I think it is an interesting experiment, I like the sepia tone that gives it a delicate appearance.

If you are interested I will upload what I did, but only if you want to.

 

( I have opened my dance exhibition, I will send you the invitation and catalogue)

pnina, a venus flytrap is a type of carnivorous plant characterized by spike-edged pads that rapidly collapse to trap insects that lad on them. The wiki article is useful http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_Flytrap. Pete's photo is the bloom of the plant.

I can't read Hebrew and have no idea what it says, but, this is the Hebrew wiki page http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%93%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%90%D7%94 .

Thanks! well the Hebrew was explaining it very nicely, I know the plant, but not the English name , So you see, every day I add something new to my English vocabulary....

 

Now I need an explanation of the technic.....I read about it, but did not really understand how it is done, some manipulation with the lens?

( btw, Ian, my self portrait is still waiting for you....LOL)

 

Anyway, looking for the Hebrew text was a very nice gallant gesture of yours!

Ian, thanks very much for explaining the plant to Pnina - you beat me to it by hours!

 

Pnina, this really was a simple photo with no funny lens business. I was just experimenting with the Pentacon 1.8/50 lens at wide (f1.8) aperture, and looking down on the flower so the helically winding stem can be seen. I had difficulty trying to get the flower in sharp focus as the DOF is very very small and the focus screen in my Canon 10D is a bit dark to see too well. Also, I have to focus manually. I have just ordered a different focusing screen - the sort with the split image centre and I think it is also brighter. This should help me to focus better.

 

The only post processing was to crop the image to square shape and to convert to BW with sepia tone. I like the suggestion that you and Ian made (and did Gordon? I can't remember and I'm on the wrong screen to check!) about making the image darker, and I would love to see what you have done with it. I'm not too sure about rotating it though, as this is how I saw the plant - winding upwards.

 

Gordon - in that bit where I used the word "flow", I meant "flower" but the keyboard couldn't keep up with me!

 

thanks again everyone. Must dash as I need to turn over my bubble and squeak!

Pete I have rotated it 90 degree CW and than worked with levels to darken the whole, and than with the polygonal lasso selectively on the flowers with levels too,a tiny bit rotation to CCW to make a bit more diagonal looking... What do you think? I simply like the triangled form it is doing by the rotation, easier for the eye I think, at least for mine.

Pnina, I DEFINITELY like what you have done with the levels - it makes the flower itself much more pronounced. For me, though, I still like the original orientation which, as mentioned earlier on, is kind of reminiscent of a serpent. The levels though - you have certainly done right and I'm going to see if I can do similar.

 

Many thanks again Pnina.

 

And I wish you well with the exhibition.

 

Pete

Pete, my suggestion is always just another possibility, as we are looking at things with another pair of eyes, it is nice to compare our ways of seeing, sometimes.

I think that it is a good way for our development in the medium . Sometime you will accept it and sometime not, but it opens horizons of different points of view. Feel free to do it to my work too, if you feel like seeing things differently, I have learned a lot by it.

 

Thanks for your wishes to my exhibition, I wish geographical distances were not so big......

Pnina et al. Many thanks for your input. Here is my revised version in which I have reduced exposure (brightness) by 1 stop and increased contrast. It does seem to work much better with the flower popping from the background better, and also appearing sharper.

 

Thanks again all of you :)

 

Pete

Pete, I like it much better now. the flower is poping and the BG ellements are still visible but are not competing. The flower diagonal direction is well accentuated now and its place on the frame has the main stage.It was an interesting process! Thanks.

Thank you!

 

Today, my Venus Flytrap has now flowered properly and I have uploaded some pictures to my portfolio in a folder titled "Venus", again in sepia tone. I'm not sure which I like best so would welcome thoughts on these if anyone has a moment to spare. I'll pop one in critique forum and see what happens.